FS#13201 - [boost] Please upgrade boost (PKGBUILD proposed)

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Peter Simons (peti) - Wednesday, 11 February 2009, 10:19 GMT
Last edited by Andrea Scarpino (BaSh) - Tuesday, 04 August 2009, 19:46 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages: Extra
Status Closed
Assigned To Kevin Piche (kpiche)
Architecture All
Severity High
Priority Normal
Reported Version None
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 7
Private No

Details

* Upgrade to 1.38.0.

* Build bootstrapping bjam only if the binary doesn't exist yet.

* Don't install bjam. It's useless without the Boost.Build package (which PKGBUILD does not install).

* Ensure that the expat library is found.

* Don't install Pyste. The installation doesn't work because of missing libraries.

* Don't set CFLAGS. The variable has no effect on the build.

* Determine version of the installed Python binary dynamically.

* Added missing dependency on gcc-libs.
   PKGBUILD (1.7 KiB)
This task depends upon

Closed by  Andrea Scarpino (BaSh)
Tuesday, 04 August 2009, 19:46 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Comment by Greg (dolby) - Wednesday, 11 February 2009, 11:04 GMT
Please dont make seperate bug reports for such reasons, like the ones you did now. eg. a version bump. This is doubling the workload and probably confusing the developers rather than anything else.
Also i suggest you read the message printed above. hint: " Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!".
Judging by your description i'd say that you report does exactly that. Exactly what  FS#12720  did too.
For example, instead you could name it something like "bjam doesnt work in boost" and then write all those things incl. thats its out of date and camuflage it :)
Comment by Peter Simons (peti) - Wednesday, 11 February 2009, 11:46 GMT
Grigorios, this task is about a version update, so maybe I should not have posted it here. However, it is not just about a version update, it's also about various fixes to the PKGBUILD, so maybe it is okay to post it here. I don't know. If the task is deemed inappropriate, then I apologize for my mistake and encourage you (or any other person with the necessary privileges) to erase it from the database. Do whatever you think is right.
Comment by Alexandre Bique (babali) - Tuesday, 24 March 2009, 22:49 GMT
This pkgbuild works :-)
Comment by Alexandre Bique (babali) - Sunday, 03 May 2009, 14:41 GMT
Boost 1.39.0 is out!
   . (0 KiB)
Comment by Peter Simons (peti) - Monday, 04 May 2009, 20:12 GMT
If there is no objection, I'll upload the PKGBUILD (for 1.39.0) to AUR, denoting it as "boost-devel".
Comment by Alexandre Bique (babali) - Monday, 04 May 2009, 23:11 GMT
Why Kevin Piche isn't replying to this thread ? Maybe we should ensure he is aware of this package and this bug before forking ?
Comment by Peter Simons (peti) - Tuesday, 05 May 2009, 17:03 GMT
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=26262
Comment by Alexandre Bique (babali) - Tuesday, 05 May 2009, 17:12 GMT
Great!
Is it possible to parrallelize the build ? Because i have a quad core and it's only using one thread.
Comment by Set Killer (set_killer) - Wednesday, 03 June 2009, 19:27 GMT
The newest version (1.39) is compiling fine here.
Vote for stabilization.
Comment by Alexandre Bique (babali) - Wednesday, 10 June 2009, 10:06 GMT
I also vote ;-)
Comment by Peter Simons (peti) - Wednesday, 17 June 2009, 22:48 GMT
Alexandre, boost-devel 1.39.0-3 from AUR supports parallel builds. If you have "-jn" configured in MAKEFLAGS, then that parameter will be passed on to bjam.

Generally speaking, it would be great if someone with access to x86_64 could take a look at the package. There has been a report that gcc 4.4.0 doesn't compile Boost 1.39.0. Can anyone confirm that?
Comment by jean noel (jean_no) - Sunday, 21 June 2009, 09:03 GMT
The version (1.39) is compiling fine in x86_64.
boost-1.39.0-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.gz
$ uname -a
Linux arch64 2.6.29-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Wed May 20 06:42:43 UTC 2009 x86_64 Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E8600 @ 3.33GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux

Great work!
Comment by Set Killer (set_killer) - Sunday, 21 June 2009, 11:03 GMT
i aslo compiled it on x86_64. just forgot to mension that.

however. it looks like the package is ready for the official repository.

Loading...